If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. ** If you are logged in, most ads will not be displayed. **

Anti-virus on Linux is mainly used so that if you forward anything that's infected to Windows users who are not protected, the virus is not propagated.

We have even been able to download Windows viruses and look to see how they were made up.

On one occasion a manager sent us an infected email which caused problems on Windows, on Linux the email wouldn't open.

I have been using Linux for quite a while also, like since the first kernels were put up for ftp in late 1991 and though the likes of Kapersky Labs have been putting out scare stories about Linux viruses not one has materialised.

I have seen the old false mantra that there isn't enough Linux out there for the virus writers to pay it any attention - as most of the internet backbone, Wall Street, banks, etc. and many of the world's stock exchanges run on Linux it would certainly be a huge target for virus writers and criminals causing maximum mayhem so that shoots down that argument.

Just a personal preference here, but I'm partial to either ClamAV or AVG. I use them to scan files that I may be sharing with a Windows box.

I'm thowing in w/Jay here. I am partial to AVG, mainly because it is free, it has clients for Linux and Windows (both of which I use regularly) and Macs, and it has been proven to work for me in the past. Oh, also, I like being able to script w/it in Linux.

I have read from Wikipedia Linux Malware that there was a virus called BLISS and another RST.b that had infected the Linux OS back in 1997. Also read that a virus has to get access to the ROOT user. That tools chrootkit is all that is needed. Are other Linux Virus protectiion apps overkill some what?

My personal opinion is that some users are more likely to get a virus than others because of their own Internet and computer usage habits. I have a Windows box that I ran for 18 months without any antivirus application at all and never got a virus during that time. Still, that left me at risk although maybe not as much so as some users would have been in that same position. So far, I've never used any antivirus software under Linux.

In the end, I think some users need all the antivirus and other security software help they can get while other users may not need it so much. If you are paranoid about security, it would make sense to install whatever apps are needed to leave you feeling more comfortable. On the other hand, just because someone "feels safe", it doesn't necessarily mean they are.

Although it was probably intended to prove that Linux can be infected, it does not propagate very effectively because of the structure of Linux's user privilege system. The Bliss virus never became widespread, and remains chiefly a research curiosity

More info on "bliss" at the link below with other links with more details:

Using good passwords and running only known programs and doing only administrative tasks as root should prevent most problems. On the other hand, there are free antivirus programs available as suggested above that you are free to use. Although malware can be run on any OS, it would be more difficult on Linux/Unix because of the structure of the filesystem.

If you don't develop, you may mount your /home on a separate partition, and mark it as "noexec" at creation time, instead of "defaults". OZ is saying he doesn't even have an antivirus on his windows setup. I don't subcribe to his point of view. I myself have an antivirus on my W7 dual-boot, I almost don't surf with it, and I catched SweetIM and Boxore, 2 annoying malwares I removed by removing their directory in "C:\PROGRAM FILES" with my LinuxMint dual-boot. I don't have an antivirus on my Linux computers since 16 years, and I never catched a malware of any kind...